A blog after my own heart. One that espouses extreme opinions, no holds barred. Absurdio reductum to the end!
Do be careful to read it in the right spirit.
Communication Dilemmas #1: Wishing Death on People Without Losing Them
Part of being a science communicator is hoping a natural disaster kills as many members of the audience as possible, as soon as possible, with as much media exposure as possible. As a communicator myself, I’d like nothing better than if thousands of middle-class white people died in an extreme weather event—preferably one with global warming’s fingerprints on it. Live on cable news. Tomorrow.
The hardest thing about communicating the deadliness of the climate problem is that it isn’t killing anyone. And just between us, let’s be honest: the average member of the public is a bit (how can I put it politely?) of a moron. It’s all well and good for the science to tell us global warming is more dangerous than Nazism, but Joe Q. Flyover doesn’t understand science. He wants evidence.
So we’ve probably reached the limits of what science communication can achieve. At this point only nature herself can close the consensus gap—or the fear gap.
There are other great headlines:
How Will Climate Change Affect People With Your First Name?
Under the heading The Lasting Impacts Of Climate Change, the authors list:
5. Hundreds of species of marine life to die off because they’re too weak-willed and pathetic to handle a little ocean acidification.
6. Nation’s Brad population to begin going shirtless as early as March.
I wasn’t sure, initially, how credible the information was, so—in the spirit of actual skepticism, as opposed to “skepticism”—I sniffed around the parent site for a bit. I must admit I hadn’t heard of The Onion before, but they’re clearly a bona fide organisation, as opposed to something run out of a guy’s garage.
*cough* OISM petition *cough*
Brad has a way of turning things inside out:
The great alienator
“We’ve studied hundreds of unsuccessful exposures—’failures to convert’ [FTC]—and asked participants what went wrong with the rapport between scientist and citizen.
The single biggest rapport-breaker?
Arrogance.
Time and time again, scientists find the public arrogant.”
Take a hard hat and glass of Vodka. Channel the fear in the comments.
Don’t give the game away OK? Egg them on!
(Go on, get into the spirit. Life really is absurd)
* * *
UPDATE: OK OK — more clues. Read carefully. Brad knows us well, this is deep view that only someone who knows this debate from the inside could possibly write:
• Deniers are continually pressing for a scientific debate. Why? Because they can’t refute the political reality (that climate change necessitates a new world order). So they attack the weakest link—the science—instead.
UPDATE#2: Wit is a weapon
The word satire derives from satura, and its origin was not influenced by the Greek mythological figure of the satyr.[6] In the 17th century, philologist Isaac Casaubon was the first to dispute the etymology of satire from satyr, contrary to the belief up to that time.[7] Despite the separate origin, satire shares the subversive nature of the satyrs themselves, which was a force in opposition to urbanity, decorum, and civilization itself.
h/t to Handjive and Marc Morano.
There is so much irony on that site that all of my compass needles now point towards it.
I confess I don’t know how to read the comments there. Do serious people debate irony? Hilarious.
In this long struggle against CAGW ideology, derision has an important place. Well played Brad Keyes.
260
That kind of “many deaths on primtime news” thinking is known from only one other group: terrorists.
80
Don’t forget gun control advocates, who run in and exploit every shooting out there for their own political gain. It’s disgusting.
161
A thinking out loud here:
Look at the gun with the twisted barrel out the front of the Communist UN.
JWH brought in gun control in Australia.
Ergo, JWH is a Socialist.
Gun control is one of the greatest desires of Socialism. When you disarm people, its a lot easier to round them up and…..
10
I’m not sure I am reading your take on “The Onion” correctly. However, it is a “news satire” site and is often mistaken for a regular news outlet.
80
She also seems to be exhorting us to not give the game away and to egg them on, so as to make them have even more egg on their faces if/when any of them actually realize that they have been completely victimized by satire.
I fully agree with this strategy.
340
Was going to post a lengthy reply to Brad but am currently busy with my book “The Historical Inaccuracies Of Monty Python And The Holy Grail” 😉
270
Oh yeah this is a great read, I often use satire myself in my day job – it is part of my Escalation of the Use of Farce; satire, irony and sarcasm.
100
Only one problem with that strategy Pete; I really have my doubts that some alarmists could EVER concede they were wrong; to that extent irony is wasted on them; and let’s face it have you ever come across an alarmist with a sense of humour; I haven’t because a sense of humour requires a capacity to laugh at yourself. Alarmists could never laugh at themselves because they are too important and superior.
140
Some of the sceptics need to lighten up too. Let me quote Tomas Love Peacock:
10
It may be just me,but I have a hard time taking satire of this kind as being funny,due to the large amounts of various people that have called for similar measures over the past year,in all seriousness. There’s only so much of this that I can tolerate at any given time.
51
Yes, I guess you’re right; why satirise AGW by exaggeration when the alarmists do that very thing themselves. The difference to me is that Brad is silly and knows it; the alarmists are silly and don’t know it.
90
Sorry Jo, I can’t throw an egg that far.
Being someone who never shied away from plain speaking I can only say that when I see stuff like this I get the urge to slap some faces.
Having watched the World Trade Center fall in real time I can only say to anyone publishing this kind of speech, be careful because you’re much too easy to take seriously.
60
It’s time for the climate change pushers to engage in honest, open debate about evidence. Anything outside that realm, no matter if satire or something else is wearing thin, much too thin and much too expensive.
40
In other words, it’s not funny, not anymore.
20
Actually laughing in you opponents face is a time tested method of psychological warfare.
It is about humiliating you opponent and making them question their own beliefs. It’s a statement that they’re “Owned!”
Loosing your cool on the other hand shows that your weak.
70
Actually it is “pwned” …
10
Either form is acceptable, but clearly pwned is more 1337.
60
Yes but iof they did that they would lose – hence the appeal to the emotive/political nonsense that people with half brain can easily handle.
I could never get my head around the concept of the 80% great unwashed – until I saw it in action. Then I understood.
10
I am 100% positive that The Onion is satire as I have read the paper for years, but I am not so sure about Climate Nuremburg.
61
I am 100% sure about Climate Nuremburg. (Confirmed).
He is taking their worst attributes to their logical conclusion. Satire is a powerful way of making a political point. It reaches people who would never read a straight argument, and they find themselves saying – oh yes, oh yes,… oh no!
Wit is a weapon…
Wiki
Satire is one of the highest forms of political commentary.
190
Just want to point out that this is traditional trolling, using satire to highlight fallacious arguments. This ‘Brad’ has old school net skills in that respect. As opposed to the use of flamebait and offensive language which most people think is trolling these days.
Wondering if this is the guy… yeah, been a while, hasn’t it?
50
It is a troll breeding site …
20
OMG I love this guy! If you didn’t know about Ehrlich’s history this would sail right over your head. If you DO, it’s pure lulz.
60
Since climate change is a “wicked” problem why not a “wicked” website? Go for it!
70
Sorry to be a naysayer but wit believed to be true has turned tragic too many times. If published on a known satirical site then maybe a different matter. But this bothers me.
It’s neither funny nor wise.
40
I have to agree Roy, whilst I and many others enjoy and use various forms of humor to either convey a point or as an outlet for relief some times it can backfire and be taken completely out of the intended context.
The tactic of using satire to reach out to the general public is perhaps one of the oldest forms of debate and later used effectively in advertising, but as most people know not everyone has the same sense of humor or ability to think laterally.
After many years of no exposure to the internet I eventually got connected and not only was I struck by the wealth of information circulating but the content of some sites and the apparent freedom they had to express these views, so I had to educate myself to filter through some of the more dubious ones with ulterior motives but unfortunately many people won’t take the time to do this and herein lies the problem.
So after outing myself as a “computer rip van winkle techno hick” it just proves that people can be brutally honest without tainting an otherwise good message.
30
David Frost, who most Americans will know from the Frost report, and his interview with Nixon, started his broadcasting career in Britain in a program called, “That Was The Week That Was”, or “TW3”. This was one of the first, and serious, excursions into satire on British Television. Their technique was to focus on the political, and other quirky, stories in the British news, in the preceding week, and take them to an extreme, in the most dead-pan delivery you could imagine. It was typical British humour, of the day, very dry, deadpan, and full of innuendo. British humour, along with the spelling, has changed, to now be more like American humor, under the influence of the Interwebbythingy.
The American equivalent of the time, I guess, would be “Laugh In” which was more stereotypical and slapstick, with canned laughter.
What do I imply by this? Nothing really, except that Americans must have a latent sense of humour (or humor) or they wouldn’t have been, “Born in U.S.A”, with its’ memorable lyrics.
60
After things we’ve all seen, like exploding children, threats against Jo and others, people asking when they can throw us in jail (and that’s just a small sample), with none of it in the least satirical, how many do you think might possibly believe this?
No one would have believed TW3 was truthful because the events and the personalities depicted were known to viewers. Laugh In is of the same kind. But I don’t think Climate Nuremberg is the same thing. And I think playing to it is unwise.
20
Roy, I’m really sorry you didn’t appreciate Climate Nuremburg as much as I did. I truly laughed out loud and several times, and so did David. That is such a rare thing in this debate. Brad has a gift for turning their words inside out — “Time and time again, scientists find the public arrogant.”
It’s precisely because of things like exploding children that I find great release in razor sharp satire.
If he hadn’t been fighting at the coalface he would not parody them so achingly well. (BTW I have many straight and useful emails from him in my inbox — I didn’t realize he did satire as well. He knows the nitty gritty details of how absurd the climate wars are).
And if he is so believeable, where o where are the alarmists protests?! Who is telling him his “good intentions” have gone too far? Where is the outrage from them?
120
Maybe they are mostly not as dumb as some other people?
Or maybe they aren’t as easy to entice onto crank blogs packed full of nonsense?
Either way, the thing Keyes is characteristically wrong about, is that at Nuremberg, the people being prosecuted were actually in the wrong. They were guilty of crimes. They were afforded due process and those found guilty were punished accordingly.
I can, however, see why some people who’ve worked very hard (and dishonestly) in order to sabotage efforts at averting an identified risk might now be getting that awful squitty feeling about how history is going to judge them…
[Jen, the malicious inferences are a bore. Seriously, you are a classic study of Nefarious Intent (see Lewandowsky, retracted, 2013). Go find the evidence. If you could, I’ll change my mind and sleep well both before and after… Jo
13
Jo,
Maybe it’s I who owes, “Sorry,” to you and everyone else. But I’m uncomfortable with encouraging believing Climate Nuremberg. Much less do I like encouraging some nut to take a clue from it and get serious about it or do something harmful.
I like good satire as much as anyone (politics is the best target ever for making fun of). And as you know, I’ve nothing against taking a good verbal poke at someone who’s made a fool of himself. But this doesn’t look like it’s satire. You have to know the writers I think, for that to become obvious. And this whole global warming idea has grown until, “The evil humans are doing to [whatever],” has gotten quite big enough for me. And then some. It’s just below the surface of a whole lot more going on than some are apparently willing to believe. It’s hurting people now and will hurt even more before it’s over. And now that it’s part of popular culture it looks like not being over for a long time.
I’m not angry by the way. I just disagree.
I would have said nothing more than I already have but I figure I owe you the courtesy of a reply.
20
Perhaps part of the problem is what Rush Limbaugh has observed (and some of us long before him): You can’t do satire and exaggeration anymore because those about whom you would write the satire have views that too closely resemble the satire. What seemed like an exaggeration meant to show how ludicrous some beliefs are suddenly is incorporated into the beliefs of the saterized. Attemping to make fun of said groups actually seems to encourage more craziness.
30
You read my mind, Sheri.
00
Let’s not leave out the biggest protagonists of this profiting form disaster behavior the MSM, watching the reports on cyclone Ita yesterday the news presenters were almost pissed off that it didn’t turn out as bad as they hyped it up to be, and what sort of person thinks like that?
10
I wonder about the MSM all the time. How to you wake up every day knowing you are going to lie to people endlessly and profit from death and disaster? How do call yourself a good person when your only interest in life is to create as much fear and suffering as possible, shoving microphones in front of a person who just learned the terrorists killed their spouse and children? NBC tries to soothe their souls (or lack thereof) with the “Making a difference segment” some of which is just more propaganda. I am starting to think you really can sell your soul to the Devil for faime and fortune and these people hope the sale was nothing more than a drug-induced (or fever induced) hallucination. I really don’t understand how people can be so happy there is death and dying everywhere and take such great glee in reporting it. (My only guess is just plain being evil, but I can’t really confirm that except by their behaviour.)
10
I agree. Humour can be more effective than reasoned debate, especially if the debate is only on one side. The warmists still control many politicians but if they were made laughing stocks then they would have less control.
Satire also allows important points to be made. For example in the article highlighted it points out how warmists have become ghouls : hoping for extreme weather and then hoping it creates massive destruction and death so they can proclaim it as proof of their invisible and mystical force of ‘climate change’. Their souls must be badly damaged by now, as can be seen as their increasingly inhuman ideas of what should be done to people who disagree with them.
Back to the website : for anyone out there click on ‘home’ and start reading – it is hilarious!
20
For me the Communication Dilemma#1 was all about the grand hypocrisy of pretending to care more and be uber compassionate, while simultaneously hoping for mass death upon those you don’t like, in the quest to “save people”. The absurdity of it all…
60
The first blog post I read from him was the one linked yesterday by Handjive, and though I consider myself fairly well versed in satire, it was not obvious to me on first reading that Brad was anything more than the rabid sneering alarmist that he portrays.
Some of his earlier blog posts were more humorous and only in that context does his “The Trouble With..” post gain more appeal. I can only conclude that his ability to write satire is spotty. Sometimes it’s perfectly done, sometimes he doesn’t drop enough hints.
It’s not all his fault though. Like all satirists he risks manifesting Poe’s Law by mistake.
10
Nuremburg?
Trials
Alarmists
Crimes Against Humanity
Satire? I guess I see the connection.
30
Dangerously sharp – elements of both satire and parody.
I couldn’t imagine writing:
It is I suppose a PC ‘free hit’. Whether in illustrative jest or otherwise, given the many alternative ethnic groups and social class indicators from which one might chose, could he not have gone elsewhere?
Still, I’ll concede it appears to be a fair pointer to the latte swilling, fear mongering progressives that inhabit pseuds corner.
50
You totally miss the point. There are thousands of warmists out there who hope exactly this, even if they do not say it.
They long for, and drool over, the idea of another example of ‘man made climate change’. Especially in Australia where it be proof the new Government is being punished by
Godclimate change and should repent their heathen ways!30
I’m not sure what to make of that site. Is that ‘Climate Brad’? And is he a pro-AGW type who just doesn’t have the FIRST clue of the irony he is spewing?
10
Brad’s a carpet tack or a bradawl that reminded me of this load of cobblers:
Flav. Hence! home, you idle creatures, get you home:
Is this a holiday? What! know you not,
Being mechanical, you ought not walk 5
Upon a labouring day without the sign
Of your profession? Speak, what trade art thou?
First Com. Why, sir, a carpenter.
Mar. Where is thy leather apron, and thy rule?
What dost thou with thy best apparel on? 10
You, sir, what trade are you?
Second Com. Truly, sir, in respect of a fine workman, I am but, as you would say, a cobbler.
Mar. But what trade art thou? Answer me directly.
Sec. Com. A trade, sir, that, I hope, I may use with a safe conscience; which is, indeed, sir, a mender of bad soles.
Mar. What trade, thou knave? thou naughty knave, what trade? 15
Sec. Com. Nay, I beseech you, sir, be not out with me: yet, if you be out, sir, I can mend you.
Mar. What meanest thou by that? Mend me, thou saucy fellow!
Sec. Com. Why, sir, cobble you.
Flav. Thou art a cobbler, art thou?
Sec. Com. Truly, sir, all that I live by is with the awl: I meddle with no tradesman’s matters, nor women’s matters, but with awl. I am, indeed, sir, a surgeon to old shoes; when they are in great danger, I recover them.
Julius Caesar
00
Very clever. A latter day Johnathon Swift.
50
The holy grail of the true satirist is to be taken seriously!
The object is to create a fake manifestation which cannot, in any way, be distinguished from a real one – thus casting a destructive perspective on the perceived “real” object.
The process is well described by “Pointman” in his blog of 13th March “En Passant moves of a minor imp of satan”, where he created fake ecoloons to lampoon alarmists blogs.
The history is long – Tom Keating in the world of art, Adolph Burger, prisoner of the Nazi’s who boasted that his fake £5 notes were better than the real ones (and they were!). In 19th century Russia some fake Platinum roubles contained more of the precious metal than the official ones. The accolade goes to L.Ron Hubbard who created a fake religion, followed by millions and recognised in at least nine “developed” states as at least of equal status as the big five!
In contrast the CAGW religion has long sold its soul to the political carpetbaggers and the corruption is seeping through in plain sight. Derision is a powerful weapon they do not have. Skeptics are abused, insulted and offered contempt – but where are their jokes? The 10-10 video was the best that they can offer.
100
I am confused, is Climate Nuremberg an article in The Onion or isn’t it?
10
Smacks of JD.
30
Better JD than JB
00
Just to be clear … I didn’t mean J.D. from Scrubs … but yes, better JD than JB.
10
This site is an outrage!
The author needs to be stopped. This sort of site will blur the standard difference there is between pro and anti climate change, and could even lead to people thinking that they understand the main elements of the subject.
This site, and that obscure little site ‘The Onion’, may well lead to the disaster of the serious subject of CO2 causing extinction being seen as a laughing matter. Outrageous!
This isn’t the official view of thepeoplescube.com.
123
I totally agree. I have written to my Member of Parliament, whom I happen to know quite well, as it happens, don’t you know, and firmly suggested that he formulates a Private Members Bill, henceforth banning all onions, and anything written thereon.
That should fix things quite nicely.
130
I liked it and signed on for more. Good spot Jo.
Dear Roy Hogue, please lighten up. Eat, drink, and be merry and all that.
70
For some idea of Brad Keyes, read his comments on this thread
http://nigguraths.wordpress.com/2013/09/30/why-is-the-cultural-cognition-project-anti-intellectual/
50
Satire?
BANGALORE: J Srinivasan, professor at the Indian Institute of Science (IISc) in Bangalore, goes through his work days secretly hoping for a global major climate crisis.
As a leading climate change scientist in India, he knows that the country and the world are inching towards disaster.
A serious crisis now would shake up people and make them act, he thinks.
Are you ready to embrace the apocalypse?
“I’ve been thinking a lot about the future lately.
Facing up to the slow collapse of our planet is hard, but thinking apocalyptically could help us prepare for the crises to come”
Andrew C Revkin, Dot Earth:
Will Sandy’s Lessons Fade as a Sleepy Atlantic Storm Season Ends?
“I wouldn’t bet on a surge of late-season tropical storminess arriving to wake folks up.”
. . .
Not!
50
Jo,
FYI
http://thepointman.wordpress.com/2014/04/10/sometimes-you-dont-have-to-do-anything-but-wait/
40
Nicely put.
Anyone who’s followed alarmists’ comments threads knows that underneath it all they do relish climate disasters.
80
. . . So does the ‘scientific method’! .. Preferably empirical evidence.
If we can’t perform experiments on a planet-sized chaotic system, real-life observations in real-time will have to do.
For example, the next El Niño effect is expected to start within the next year or so. We will have to wait and see if it, and the following La Niña, has much effect on the global average temperature trend. One hypothesis says that there might be a short term increase in the trend, which will be promptly decreased (and therefore negated) by the La Niña.
10
It would appear that you are trying to drag this topic down to arguing about mere actualities, this is to be deprecated at this time.
But if you must, on the El Niños effect, I understand this is the sort of thing that happens when Spanish parents go on vacation early in the year to Panama. Well these recalcitrant parents allow their baby boys to go swimming in the Pacific despite notices attempting to dissuade such action. An inordinate amount of noise is created when some of the little rascals take a wee-wee in the sea and warm the water up a little.
Now can we change the subject to something more dignified.
21
Although the following blog linked to was always fairly rabidly alarmist in the past , the following comment shows that they have moved. It’s not the change ; it’s the rate of change. It still flies in the face of the available evidence. It would be nice if someone could set them straight. Just a wee bit of evidence 🙂
http://publicaddress.net/system/cafe/hard-news-the-language-of-climate/?p=310334#post310334
20
More sharp commentary from Keyes in this thread:
http://www.culturalcognition.net/blog/2012/12/31/wisdom-from-silvers-signal-noise-part-2-climate-change-the-p.html
40
Great link, Ron.
The comment section is worth the visit.
20
From the “they can’t be serious’ department:
Climate Change’s Cultural Tipping Point
“What do the coral reefs tell us?
Coral reefs grow in different ways based on the temperature of the ocean.
There are two Isotope of Oxygen and they assimilate those Isotope 16 and 18.
The ratio of these two isotopes determines how warm the water is, very precisely. By drilling these coral cores, you can go back hundreds and hundreds of years and tell me exactly what the temperature of the Pacific was on any date in the history of the coral.
Her data is useful in figuring out whether these models work or not.”
. . .
If the coral is ‘hundreds of years old’, and is still there … Doh!
Check out this excellent gif showing the failure of UN-IPCC computer models over the years.
~ ~ ~
A final quote from the Mens Journal for all the ‘climate kommunicators’:
Q. Do you think the documentary will have an impact on public opinion?
“At the end of the day I actually think the film is going to tip the needle.
I don’t think anyone ever has assembled such an astonishing team with such an astonishing budget given them such latitude to tell the story in the really in-depth way.
I think at the end of the day, this will change hearts and change minds.”
30
I often feel that my seminal study of Stephan Lewandowsky’s underpants has been sadly neglected. The paper, “An insight into the turbid fury(with skidmarks) of a perpetual self-deluder” was unfairly overlooked.
Wait til you get to the part where he comes up with a new theory as to why all of Shakespeare was written on Venus by a lady named Stephie with a cat called Madame Tresmagisma in 1489. That’s one of the better bits.
70
So far that’s two samples for analysis from one pair of undies, all you need now is to take the p#$$ out of him and you’ve got the trifecta.
40
We’ve achieved a fair sort of shift in the alarmist gospel. We seem to be here . . . The planet’s O.K. : Homo sapiens O.K. : it’s the civilisation that is under threat.
Now where have I heard that before?
I wonder what examples of moai are being built as we speak. Surely not more desalination plants in Oz? Maybe . . . what could they be . . . ?
http://publicaddress.net/system/cafe/hard-news-the-language-of-climate/?p=310344#post310344
30
The absolute best thing about that article is that Brad had both sides arguing with him 😉 I wish I could craft something that well.
80
***who would? and this is the serious(?) press!
11 April: Guardian: ***Don’t blame camels for global warming, study concludes
by Alex Kirby for Climate News Network, part of the Guardian Environment Network
One of the latest arcane revelations comes from scientists in Switzerland, who describe in the Public Library of Science journal PLOS One why we should not heap blame on camels for adding to the methane already in the atmosphere.
Camels – and their camelid relatives, llamas, guanacos, alpacas, vicuñas, dromedaries and Bactrian camels – do produce methane, which is more than 20 times as potent a greenhouse gas as carbon dioxide. But they produce significantly less of it than ruminants like cattle, sheep and goats…
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/apr/11/dont-blame-camels-for-global-warming-climate
20
Oh heck, I was just informing all that AGW was being exacerbated by specially trained super-methane expelling Al Kieda trained camels…
60
Let’s have an apocalypse. Are you ready to r-r-r-r-r-r-rumble?
Great post Jo.
50
hilarious & humourless to the very end:
11 April: Guardian: Dana Nuccitelli: Climate imbalance – disparity in the quality of research by contrarian and mainstream climate scientists
Contrarian papers tend to be rebutted quickly in peer-reviewed literature, but receive disproportionate media attention
A new paper has been published in the journal Cosmopolis entitled Review of the consensus and asymmetric quality of research on human-induced climate change. The paper was authored by John Abraham, myself, and our colleagues John Cook, John Fasullo, Peter Jacobs, and Scott Mandia. Each of the authors has experience in publishing peer-reviewed responses to flawed contrarian papers.
Despite the 97% expert consensus on human-caused global warming supported by peer-reviewed research, expert opinion, the IPCC reports, and National Academies of Science and other scientific organizations from around the world, a large segment of the population remains unconvinced on the issue…
This ‘consensus gap’ is in large part due the media giving disproportionate coverage to climate contrarians. In our paper, we sought to evaluate whether that disproportionate media coverage was justified by examining how well contrarian hypotheses have withstood scientific scrutiny and the test of time. The short answer is, not well…
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2014/apr/11/climate-change-research-quality-imbalance
20
Thanks to Climate Science, the genre of Satire has at last assumed its rightful place in the Peer Reviewed Literature.
–
Obviously influenced by ‘Professor Bunyip’s hilarious Alene Composta parody, Professor Stephan Lewandowsky (latterly of UWA) has helped to produce a couple of farcical works of his own. Papers wittily dubbed ‘Moon Hoax’ and ‘Recursive Fury’ were accepted for publication by good sports Psychological Science and Frontiers in Psychology respectively. (NB. Some of the scallywags at Frontiers have since forced a retraction of ‘Recursive Fury’, adding to the fun!)
–
Recognising the spoof, several climate sceptics including the dry-witted Steve McIntyre of Climateaudit.org laughably requested of UWA, relevant data that Lewandowsky had impishly withheld (as if!), as well as other items of comic distraction.
…To which the uproariously funny UWA Vice Chancellor Prof. Paul Johnson quipped “It is not the University’s practice to accede to such requests.” (Basil Fawlty eat your heart out!)
–
Enjoy some of the antics here;http://climateaudit.org/2014/03/30/uwa-vice-chancellor-johnson-circles-the-wagons/
–
It’s all good fun, and the PEER REVIEWED LITERATURE is the better for it.
60
Add the latest post from http://nigguraths.wordpress.com/2013/11/08/3758/ titled
The Lewandowsky Recursive Fury Ethics ‘Approval’ to this as well,as it makes good reading as well. I’ll reproduce some of it below.
The now-withdrawn Lewandowsky Fury paper (link) is possibly one of the egregious examples of ethically compromised research encountered. Delve into the paper, the first thing crossing one’s mind is: how did the university ethics committee approve this project? This was the study protocol – Lewandowsky’s associates would carry out real-time surveillance on people criticizing his paper, prod and provoke them, record their responses and perform ‘analysis’. How did they say yes?
30
So was Lemonsucker Milne taking the urine with her comments about Ita, Abbott666 and the Reeeeeeef or not?
20
According to the GBRMPA, the earliest GBR structures existed 600,000 years ago. Therefore the GBR has not only survived 600,000 years of cyclones, it has grown larger over that time.
Various corals are reported to grow vertically at rates between 10mm/year and 150mm/year. The sea level rise at the beginning of the Holocene peaked at over 37mm/y. The present sea level rise of 3mm/y is small by comparison.
The world temperature was higher at the beginning of the Holocene than it is today, and from Peru there is evidence of a Medieval Warm period in the Southern Hemisphere about as warm as the late 20th century.
Geological and proxy evidence shows the GBR has survived more cyclones, heat, and sea level rise than we are presently experiencing. There is no historic basis for a modern existential threat to the GBR, but at most a shift in the habitable zone for corals as they have clearly managed many times before.
This is why I’m not invited to Ove’s parties.
50
The people most prominent in the Global Warming money train are actually not scientists, but economists like Canberra’s Richard Dennis “Dennis prefaces his presentation by saying he is an economist, and not a scientist. Then he proceeds to dive head first into typical alarmism by equating climate change (an oxymoron) with “skin cancer.”
You can add Ross Garnaut, Ken Henry and Bernie Fraser and more prominent economists who have between them the science of a gnat. This is the group who along with all the world’s expert economists failed to predict the eminently predictable collapse of the fake derivatives market and the consequent GFC. Universally though, they know how to fix it with their special gift of 20/20 hindsight. Sadly it has been true of some scientists who see far more merit in Global Warming than in running around saying the world is not collapsing after all.
Politicians will change with every wind direction, except the Labor party in Australia who would have very few seats at all without the support of the Greens. Traditional blue collar seats like Melbourne Ports (Michael Danby), seats retained by Labor since Federation have only survived on Green preferences for two decades. So the country is being run, like so many by the extreme left. An unfortunate aspect of this is that the Labor party support has been collapsing because of this extremism, making the party even more dependent on what Senator Bullock calls the Mad Left.
So no amount of parody actually captures a political and opportunistic view of Climate Change which bears no relation to the facts. How long will it be before the Left tells us the Carbon tax has saved the planet from warming?
140
Looking forward to meeting Dr Patrick Michaels in three weeks in Brisbane.
He’s no economist, got his PHD in climatology in 1979 so he knows his stuff and scorns the fools that are on the AGW conga line.
Worthy of $15 to hear him speak if one is not an IPA member.
Bookings.
10
TdeF
April 12, 2014 at 10:30 am
Sounds like more in the genre of that famous publication
“How to do it and not get it”,
written by
“One who did it, got it and can’t get rid of it”
10
Did you mean “oxymoron” or “tautology/truism”?
10
Morning all.
Brad Keynes quotes Kamden in saying:
“I hope against knowledge of her path, that Cyclone Ita will wipe Cairns off the map”
Then why stop there? People will surely take notice of further positive reinforcement of their climate performance? Why not Townsville, Gladstone, Brisbane?
And why, in these days of supercomputers and sophisticated computer models, should any climate event be an act of chance? With the power of the carbon tax, combined with the scientific and intellectual horsepower at the Bureau of Meteorology and the CSIRO, Climate Scientists should be able to “call the shots”, as it were, bringing the required level of armageddon to those sinful cities which fail to show suitable repentence and remorse.
Weather reports could start off with a hymn to gaia, followed by a lengthy tract from the IPCC, then a fire and brimstone sermon on the evils of civilisation. As the collection plate comes around, (credit card accepted, of course), the forcast lists of cities, crimes and casualties is flashed across the screen to spur the public to greater sacrifice…
Utopia.
Cheers,
Speedy
80
The Onion has been around about eight years, starting on YouTube and a few years ago making cable TV on the Comedy Channel and some pieces on the Independent Film Channel. They take shots at anyone and everyone. I suppose there are a few mush-brains that take them seriously, but hopefully they won’t reproduce.
10
1988 for the print version.
00
It’s all well and good for the science to tell us global warming is more dangerous than Nazism, but Joe Q. Flyover doesn’t understand science. He wants evidence.
Talk about laugh out loud….I rocked back and forth and clapped my hands and had to dry my tears. WHAT a NUMPTIE!
Apparently ‘science’ is NOT about evidence….lol
21
Been to read the whole thing over at Climate Nuremberg. Unbelievable! What an absolute tosser.
01
nothing funny here!
11 April: Reuters: IMF, World Bank push for price on carbon
The leaders of the International Monetary Fund, World Bank and United Nations on Friday called upon finance ministers to use fiscal policies, such as carbon taxes, to combat climate change.
IMF Managing Director Christine Lagarde and World Bank President Jim Yong Kim were joined by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon at their 2014 spring meetings to address a group of 46 finance ministers and senior officials on policies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Lagarde said their goal was to explain to ministers and officials what fiscal tools they can use that would benefit the environment while ***stimulating global economies.
She said she would discuss how to shift taxation from the traditional labour and investment base “to a base that is environmentally correct,” she told reporters ahead of the meeting.
Lagarde said carbon taxes and removing fossil fuel subsidies are “intelligent” ways to reallocate resources to benefit the environment…
Ban called on finance ministers and private investors to hold a meeting in the coming months that “could pave the way for a common approach” and make low-carbon investments more attractive to ***institutional investors…
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/04/11/climatechange-money-idUKL2N0N31GT20140411
00
A “price on carbon”… it’s just laughable isn’t it, yet we are supposed to take it seriously.
About 30 years ago if you had told somebody they should buy a solar-powered torch, they would have laughed at you and said it must have been “an Irish joke“. These days people are less racist, but somehow more credulous of equally counter-productive doctrines. Even in developing countries with no electricity or streetlights where people can’t afford to buy batteries, their choice of power source for recharging torches is invariably a built-in hand crank dynamo and not a built-in solar panel. Yet the useless solar-powered tokens of eoclunacy continue to sell in the West.
If judged on that basis alone it would seem the people of the developing countries have been the least adversely affected by the global warming phenomenon.
20
Jo thanks for posting this, Brad Keyes is deadly, this is satire of excellence.
The way he leaves you hanging is gorgeous.
Keyes is the kind of mind who is the alarmed ones new best friend, at first the activist will feel vindicated and supported, a little while later a growing discomfort will overcome them.
Shame the laugh track generations lack the attention span to enjoy such skill.
Mind you the Cult of Calamitous Climate supporters do come out with accidental self satire, the bitching about the fact that sceptical persons and blogs were obsessed with the science and therefore not willing to discuss mitigation policies, was one such.
50
Is Climate Nuremburg where Tim Flannery defends himself by claiming he was only following orders?
70
wish this was satire:
11 April: The Chronicle: Liana Turner: Tweed Heads cane farmer 2014 National Carbon Cocky Farmer
The third-generation cane farmer from Duranbah, near Tweed Heads, won the National Carbon Cocky (Farmer) of the Year award this month…
After 20 years of work on carbon farming, Mr Quirk said he was “pretty happy about the whole thing”…
He said the award, which was presented at the National Carbon Farming Conference and Expo in Canberra, was a huge honour…
***”We’ve had nine PhD studies done on the farm,” Mr Quirk said…
It’s a concept supported by the Australian Government…
http://www.thechronicle.com.au/news/robert-is-one-great-cocky/2226093/
00
if this was written by graham readfearn, it wouldn’t be so bad, but check this guy’s position!
11 April: Huffington Post: Time to Leave Our Bad Carbon Boyfriend
by Bob Brinkmann, Director of Sustainability Studies at Hofstra University
Breaking up is a very difficult thing to do.
Unless you married your high school sweetheart, we have all done it. And it hurts. It is never easy to give up on the hope you shared as a couple — the dreams, your favorite song and shared possessions. Building a life together holds so much promise.
But break-ups happen all the time and we find ways to move on and survive. We all understand this and do what is best for us during these difficult transitions. We make choices to make our lives better for the future.
I think it is time to admit that as a society we need to break up with our bad boyfriend, carbon…
I also know that some of our best friends and cousins are telling us that carbon is not all that bad for us. They do not want us to break up. However, to whom are you going to listen to on issues of global climate change? All the scientists of the world, or your friend or cousin?…
(CLOSING LINE) Whatever we do, I know that a break-up is the right thing for the children.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-brinkmann/carbon-climate-change_b_5136604.html
00
😮
It’s published 10 days too late, right?
We don’t actually live in a world where taxpayer funded academics actually believe nonsense like that, do we?
Please say it’s not true.
Please tell me this is satire and we’re not being lectured on the end of the world by Mr Staypuft.
00
A bit of warning on the photo Andrew, UGHH 🙁
00
***you got it, Mr Nyatsumba:
11 April: Australian: Staff Reporter: South African industry cites ‘rich’ Australia for carbon backdown
The South African steel industry is calling for its government to abandon plans for a carbon price, citing “developed” Australia’s stance on the subject was “worthy of emulation”, the Africa-based Business Day reports…
Mr Nyatsumba said a developing country like South Africa – one of the largest polluters per capita in the world, because of its massive reliance on coal-fired power plants – could not afford to be a “pioneer” when it came to “well-meaning” international protocols on environmental matters, when developed economies like the US and Australia “understandably put their ***own economies first”, Business Day reports.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/latest/south-african-industry-cites-rich-australia-for-carbon-backdown/story-e6frg90f-1226881301387
20
Is this satire or propaganda? Do people with literal brains see the irony, or do they take it on board literally?
The Onion audience profile: predominantly male 18-34 y/old Caucasians, attending college or grad school, no children.
https://www.quantcast.com/theonion.com
10
Thank you for linking to Climate Nuremberg. I brought it to the attention of Prof. Bardi at http://cassandralegacy.blogspot.it/2014/04/climate-of-intimidation-frontiers.html. Instead of commenting on the views ascribed to C.R.R.Kampen, he says I am wrong in “thinking I am funny”. I am impressed by the ability of scientists like Prof. Bardi to read people’s minds. Do you think this is how they ascribe various views to deniers even though the deniers publicly deny having such views?
10
UKIndian,
thank you for communicating with Professor Bardi. Could you please provide a specific link to the exchange you mention, and would you mind my quoting it (assuming it’s the kind of exchange that helps the cause)?
One of my firm convictions, as both a science communicator and a science-communication scientist—and I have absolutely no evidence for this—is that people feel more inclined to trust climate scientists once they’ve seen the ordinary, down-to-earth, plain-talking things they say “behind closed doors.”
—ClimateNuremberg editorial staff
10
Thank you for the link, Jo. What a great site! Absolutely hilarious.
00
One of my favorite SLAAD lyrics “You’re full of wit and it hits the fan”.
Great site by the way.
00
At the beginning of the month I found Brad Keyes’ blog off of Shub Niggurath’s Climate blog roll and posted a timely blog entry on Bishop Hill which holds true now. Very Glad Brad Keyes’ writing is getting airtime. His writing is precious and must be shared!
20
Well now I am feeling very stupid. I visited the site and did not realize it was satire. I’ve read more then a few articles calling for either the death or jailing of skeptics and this just seemed more of the same. So I brought this articles to the attention of a few friends now I am going to have to go to them and admit I was fooled. NOT FUNNY!
00
Jim,
don’t feel stupid. You’re not alone. You’re not even in a minority. Most commenters take several comments to figure it out! Look at the comments section.
40
Jo, feel free to delete my intervention there once Jim has seen it—I just had to say something because I’m such a softie, I cannot bear the thought that I’ve upset, embarrassed or aburinated anyone. (And for the record, Jim is the first person to indicate “feeling stupid” so far, of the dozens of people who got “tricked.” Most seem to take comfort in numbers!)
20
He is an astute observer.
Particularly liked this one:
There is much more. Hope he manages to maintain the quality.
00
Brad Keyes thanks for the kind words. It’s fine with me if my comments are deleted too (no paper trail of being so badly fooled, lol)
10
I vaguely recall a book written perhaps 30 years ago called something like “wet fish”
Basically the author wrote letters to important people in politics and industry espousing extreme views in accordance with political, industrial ethos at the time. As they replied , he would write again going further and further with dafter and more extreme thoughts.
I wonder if there is any mileage in a new book with alarmists contributing to the comedy.
Good idea one :- A letter to Mann fully supporting his right to withhold any evidence which might incriminate him, with an offer to assist in making the evidence “go away”.
Just a thought, copyright not restricted,anyone fancy a crack at it?
00
After extensive research , it was the Henry Root letters. Apologies for the misinformation.
00
I know this person R.R. Kampen. He is also on Facebook. I debate with him here:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/174503720217/
He is beyond curing. He takes the bogus Marcott 2013 for real.
00
Unfortunately I do not speak the language on the site ,so ,I follow the link and I find further links to
http://whatsupwiththatwatts.blogspot.com/2013/03/marcott-et-al-2013-collection-of.html ,which is obviously a climate denier blog in so far as they have failed to notice that observation and fact have overtaken conjecture and mystic meg probability as espoused by the best climate modelers in the universe.
Nobody knows the temperature of the Earth today ,or yesterday. To know what the “world” temperature is ,would involve a simultaneous reading from a billions of thermometers aligned vertically and horizontally throughout the ground,atmosphere and sea.
Not satellite imaging which is corrupt for all of the reasons outlined below.
Account would have to be taken of the Earths core temperature and any anomalies in the stratosphere,troposphere and thermosphere,account would also have to be taken of wind, cloud, water vapour in all and every part of the atmosphere simultaneously. At the same time we would need to look at where we are in relation to Earths orbit , how the Sun is performing today, the effects of planetary interference, various periodic sea anomalies and what the plankton are up to, in addition the vast majority of volcanoes are sub sea, no one has a clue what they are doing or providing subsequently to the atmosphere, add a bit of tectonic movement, the occasional earthquake and the odd meteor strike.Hardly surprising that any model has yet to advise on a one time basis a correct prediction for temperature.
Thank your god for the troposphere , the self regulating system which made our planet the nice place to live, feel sorry for those living somewhere not as bountiful ,but upshot is , they need to move, not live on the edge of a desert, or on a flood plain or coasts which invariably suffer storms and seas. Alternatively , people like Oxfam could get off their lazy arses and provide water and electricity instead of a bag of rice to people incapable of helping themselves,mostly ,education and infrastructure is the key.
That would involve massive expenditure , money better spent than building freaking windmills!
Just kinda saying ya know?
00
When it comes to debunking the new “hockey stick” 2013 by Marcott you better check Judith Curry’s site:
http://judithcurry.com/2013/03/19/playing-hockey-blowing-the-whistle/
00
Well, I thought ClimateNuremberg was an entirely refreshing hoot but there seems to be some confusion about the intent.
Here’s what Kampen said:
Brad has taken Kampen’s diabolical words out for a run in the park, just to see where it goes.
But you have to be aware of the strict Moderation policy; it’s Nazi like.
I’m not even allowed to use the ‘u’ word any more. 🙂
Brilliant work, Brad.
00
LOL just visited wotsupwitthatwatts
left the following message , interesting to see how dumb they are
Wow , The Terminator !
great movie guys , the people at skeptical science must be proud of this one,its just too good !
Did Cameron the Director do the Titanic? Great movie, especially as the ship sinks.
People should be aware how close we are to frying planet earth, if it saves one life all that money spent will be worth it and what about the rainforest?
20
On Facebook R.R. Kampen is known as Roderiko Kampen. He is Dutch
00